God's Preservation

Here is a leading question, where was the word of God before the arrival of the KJV in the 17th century? Was it preserved or being preserved?

 

*gets some popcorn and a front-row seat*

This ought to be fun.

 

Preservation is an active process in which God has, and still does, preserve His word for all generations. The act of preservation is ongoing and certainly did not cease in 1611, 1885, 1901, 1982 or even 2007. Why would God actively preserve His word and then suddenly stop, leaving future generations without? That idea doesn't make a bit of sense because God just doesn't give up on things.

 

Not sure where this answer goes-

I believe that God preserves his word in the lives of those believers who live in it, live it out, and are 'living epistles' (2 Cor. 3:1-3).

 

The church has always possessed the written Word that predates the KJV. What do you think the Church Fathers use to combat the heretics of their day? What do you think Augustine, Athanasius, Luther used before the KJV?

To suggest that God only preserved the Word as it is faithfully lived is to miss the whole point. Look at the OT, there was always some form of the written Word. By the time of the NT, Jesus and the apostles were quoting the Septuagint. Simple, the Word of God has always been preserved in written form.

 

Abraham and Jacob might disagree; but since Moses at least part of God's words have been preserved in written form. But it is certain that not all of God's words to mankind, or through men, have been written down for us.

For example, we know that God communed with Adam in the garden before the Fall, but that was not recorded (or at least not preserved) for us. We can safely conclude that everything that Moses spoke of behalf of the Lord is not recorded (or again, not preserved) for us. Certainly, not every mundane thing Moses spoke in his life was inspired material (such as, 'Please pass the salt'); however, we do not know the volumes that would have been filled of God's instructions to the Hebrews that he spoke to them over the course of 40 years; those words were inspired for those people at that time. Did the Israelites have the complete preserved Word of God before the book of the Law was "found" in the Temple? Well, it hadn't been in their hands for some time.

Paul is another example, since he certainly wrote other letters that were not preserved (that we know of). I feel confident that those letters contained God inspired words for those individuals or congregations of that era.

The Lord has choosen not to disclose every bit of His total communication to humanity to each and every generation, but I believe He provides what is needed. Don't be alarmed: the earliest Hebrews did not have all the writings of the prophets, but the Pentateuch was sufficient for them; the earliest Christians did not have all the apostolic epistles and gospels gathered together, but the revelation they had was sufficient for them. I have no reason to think that God is dealing with us any differently today.

If I were stranded upon a desert isle with a damaged partial Bible, you can be sure I wouldn't be complaining about not having the complete preserved Word of God in my hands. I am not as concerned about word's from God that I don't have access to, as the ones I do.

 

See what I get for responding before I am completely awake? I can't believe that I said that. Too many long hot days in the sun getting to me, I guess.

Preservation is not the right word. Carry on.

 

you are right on that Franklin. Not in written form but in memory, I supposed in that case, there was a preservation of what God had communicated to them.

I was so focus on the written form that I forget a whole history of God's communication with man.

 

So, are the passages that proclaim that God's words will be preserved referring to all His words, or just the written ones?

I think it can be difficult to limit the doctrine to just written words. That is to say, that if the words weren't written down then they weren't important enough to preserve.

What then does the preservation of the Lord's words mean? I don't think it must mean that words in a specific language within a bookish format is available to all people at all times. Whatever it means or includes is completely in the hands of God.

 

But whatever it means, we must agree that God had a means of preserving the Word before its written form, as in the case of Patriarchs. Because God is sovereign in all things, He had a means of preserving Him Word even if it meant using finite man in the process.

 

No one is denying that God's Word is now preserved only in written form. What we were arguing is before the written preservation, there must have been oral traditions that were preserved among the Patriarchs. No true student of the Bible would deny that.

But today God's Word is preserved entirely in written form. I do not believe in progression revelation. God has given us His Word for all time. No new revelation is coming from God. If someone claims new revelation, you know it's not true revelation.

 

Yes, I concur. And this question remains: are the Bible verses upon which the doctrine of "preservation" is based referring to only it's own written testimony, or could they have been understood at the time of their recording as including all the words of God?

 

I think the first written Scripture was the Book of Job. But the Pentateuch was the first Scripture written at God's command.

God wanted them WRITTEN as a permanent witness to mankind of what He'd said. And I believe Moses used a scribe, as he was quite busy every day managing the affairs of Israel. lending credence to the scribe idea is the fact that Moses' death was written about.

Oral tradition isn't worth the paper it's written on. It can be changed all too easily.

Does a new translation remove the validity of older ones? I don't believe so. The Geneva Bible is just as valid as the KJV.

And, contrary to what seemsta be the belief of some, God did NOT retire in 1611. He goes right on updating & providing His word in current language...the language HE has chosen for this generation to use.

 

So by your assumption, those three fellows had it all right? But then, forgive me if I have you confused with another poster, you have used these very three to say they did not have the "handle" on the word of God,per se.

 

Thus the reason behind the Canon of Scripture/ the completion of the written text as we now have it ,and have had it.

 

Do you have words of God that are not written?

Any word from God is important enough to call that word "Divine"

Yep, that's God alright, leaving men all the time guessing what He said and why He said it.

 

I would be careful to award the Lord with the way men pervert speech, roby. This generation is probably the worst in history about perverting words to "fit" their societies.